I'm sure you're reading the title of this post and groaning, I don't know many people who like grammar or even the idea of grammar but as I'm reading the first chapter of The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language, (I know, sounds like enthralling reading eh?) I'm trying to formulate my opinion regarding prescriptivism and descriptivism in regards to grammar.
Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on how you look at it) my opinion on prescriptivist versus descriptivist gramar ends with one word that can be used in many many different areas of life; balance. According to the text modern grammarians/linguists agree with me, there should be a balance of some sort between prescribing rules and describing patterns. In the past I have always fallen on the more prescriptive side of the house, and I still correct people's grammar (especially my children and sometimes my wife). However, I'm not blind nor am I an idiot. Language change happens and there's nothing we can do about it. The academies set up in several European countries (noticeably NOT in England, and NOT in the US) failed to stop language change. According to the text I'm reading even the LAW in France couldn't stop the anglicization of French so some degree. The realist in me says if they couldn't stem the tide of language change what makes me think that I can? The traditionalist (read: conservative) in me says NOOOO, language has rules and grammar for a logical reason, so that we can all understand each other and have a common framework with which to communicate.
Reading this text, and in no small way, my recent Korean review class; I've decided to try to be a little more openminded toward language change. My current postulate on the issue is such: Teach correct grammar, syntax, spelling and other language rules, and when anomalies occur when they've been accepted by the general public and are commonly understood by the general culture, accept them as language change. Then after an anomaly has become accepted by culture to the point where everyone understands it and has used it for a long time ('long time' being subjective on purpose) then incorporate it into teaching. However, that all being said there should be plenty of recorded history of language as it once was. The comprehensive dictionary, (of course limited dictionaries will have to pare down their lists of words to fit in compact volumes) for example, should NEVER take out words, words that have fallen out of common usage should simply have some kind of note stating such. I'm sure some of my ideas are already in use, especially the one about archaic words being noted as such in the dictionary, as I've seen such notations in the dictionary in the past.
Much of my reservations on this topic stem from our future generations' becoming even worse than we are at forgetting our traditions and history. I feel that we, as a global society, are constantly losing touch with our history. The pervasive thought (seemingly worldwide) is that newer is better and older is worse. A funny quote that I've only heard in the children's cartoon movie The Incredibles, one of the final scenes two old men are talking:
"See that?"
"Eh"
"That's the way to do it, that's old school."
"Yeah, no school like the old school."
Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on how you look at it) my opinion on prescriptivist versus descriptivist gramar ends with one word that can be used in many many different areas of life; balance. According to the text modern grammarians/linguists agree with me, there should be a balance of some sort between prescribing rules and describing patterns. In the past I have always fallen on the more prescriptive side of the house, and I still correct people's grammar (especially my children and sometimes my wife). However, I'm not blind nor am I an idiot. Language change happens and there's nothing we can do about it. The academies set up in several European countries (noticeably NOT in England, and NOT in the US) failed to stop language change. According to the text I'm reading even the LAW in France couldn't stop the anglicization of French so some degree. The realist in me says if they couldn't stem the tide of language change what makes me think that I can? The traditionalist (read: conservative) in me says NOOOO, language has rules and grammar for a logical reason, so that we can all understand each other and have a common framework with which to communicate.
Reading this text, and in no small way, my recent Korean review class; I've decided to try to be a little more openminded toward language change. My current postulate on the issue is such: Teach correct grammar, syntax, spelling and other language rules, and when anomalies occur when they've been accepted by the general public and are commonly understood by the general culture, accept them as language change. Then after an anomaly has become accepted by culture to the point where everyone understands it and has used it for a long time ('long time' being subjective on purpose) then incorporate it into teaching. However, that all being said there should be plenty of recorded history of language as it once was. The comprehensive dictionary, (of course limited dictionaries will have to pare down their lists of words to fit in compact volumes) for example, should NEVER take out words, words that have fallen out of common usage should simply have some kind of note stating such. I'm sure some of my ideas are already in use, especially the one about archaic words being noted as such in the dictionary, as I've seen such notations in the dictionary in the past.
Much of my reservations on this topic stem from our future generations' becoming even worse than we are at forgetting our traditions and history. I feel that we, as a global society, are constantly losing touch with our history. The pervasive thought (seemingly worldwide) is that newer is better and older is worse. A funny quote that I've only heard in the children's cartoon movie The Incredibles, one of the final scenes two old men are talking:
"See that?"
"Eh"
"That's the way to do it, that's old school."
"Yeah, no school like the old school."
